Dear Editor,
Vice President Jagdeo’s recent pronouncement on ownership of shares in companies by ministers reveals a dangerously disturbing development. The fact that it was made at the ruling party’s head office and not at a government location only adds to the concern.
We are witnessing the de facto implementation of party paramountcy made infamous in the Sophia Declaration – the doctrine for which the PNC was rightfully condemned. His statement that “we told [ a named Minster] he had to disengage” demonstrates how party directives have superseded proper governmental channels and constitutional authority.
This situation is aggravated by the egregious realisation that the authority to set standards of ministerial conduct rests in the law and the President, not the ruling party’s General Secretary or a vice-president. Mr. Jagdeo goes even further. He speaks as though he personally oversees ministers’ compliance with ethical guidelines and Integrity Commission declarations – an access to which he has no legal right, and one rife with irony.
His attitude toward the fundamental conflict between public duty and private interest shows that even after thirty years, he still does not subscribe to or understand the basic principles of decency in public life. While ordinary public servants face strict rules on what they may do outside of their public service duties, ministers who wield far greater power over national decisions are apparently exempt from these basic ethical requirements.
Ministers today receive substantial salaries and perks, specifically designed to ensure their undivided attention to public service. Yet what we are witnessing appears to be unbridled greed, with ministers rapidly joining the ranks of Guyana’s wealthiest citizens during their tenure in office.
Mr. Jagdeo’s assertion that ministers need only “avoid conflict of interest” while maintaining business interests is, at best, dangerously naive and deliberately misleading at worst. In a small economy like Guyana’s, with government decisions affecting virtually every sector, no minister can objectively isolate their private interests from their public duties. In any case, conflict is a matter of perception, not a fact established by evidence.
The irony cannot be lost on anyone: while the PPP/C once championed the separation of party and state and decried the corruption of power, they now embody those very practices. This is not merely about technical compliance with rules – it is about the fundamental integrity of our governance and the principle that public office is a service, not a path to personal enrichment.
President Ali must act to restore integrity to his government. His duty is clear: assert his constitutional authority and end this abuse of public office. Or accept responsibility for the corruption his silence and inaction enable.
Yours faithfully,
Christopher Ram